+1 -Paolo
> On 5 November 2012 13:55, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu> wrote:
>> prov-wg,
>>
>> Your approval is needed for the draft response to issue 552.
>>
>> The response is at
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ResponsesToPublicComments#ISSUE-552_.28Influence_subclasses.29
>>
>> and is copied below.
>>
>> Please raise objections before tomorrow 5pm UK time, so that we can close
>> this out before the F2F.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>> ISSUE-552 (Influence subclasses)
>>
>> Original email:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-comments/2012Sep/0000.html
>> Tracker: https://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
>> Group Response:
>>
>> On "subclassing Influence":
>>
>> The WG agrees with the suggestion that the phrase "a particular case of
>> derivation" should be expressed using rdfs:subClassOf.
>> Since the prov-dm's definitions for revision, quotation, and primary source
>> mention that they are "particular case[s] of derivation", then it follows
>> that each should be subclasses in the PROV-O encoding. We changed PROV-O to
>> include these three classes as a subclass of Derivation.
>> The WG aggress with the reviewer that "a kind of" is a more natural phrasing
>> than "a particular case", and so we have adopted it as suggested.
>>
>> On the phrasing of definitions:
>>
>> It was pointed out that the definitions for
>> "{Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence" are inconsistent with that of their
>> parent class "Influence".
>> The source of this inconsistency is that {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence
>> are not defined by prov-dm, but by prov-o as artifacts of encoding prov-dm's
>> model into the paradigm of OWL (i.e., the use of the qualification pattern
>> to describe binary relations).
>> The inconsistent definitions were "demoted" to rdfs:comments because they
>> focus too heavily on the RDF and OWL paradigm and not enough on how they are
>> expressing the abstract model of prov-dm.
>> New definitions were created to align with their parent class, with a focus
>> on how the classes are expressing the abstract model of prov-dm.
>>
>> On the inconsistency of subclasses according to "general understanding of
>> the english terms":
>>
>> The reviewer points out that the definitions of Influence, EntityInfluence,
>> and Start illustrate an inconsistency: "influence is a capacity, an entity
>> influence is a provider (of descriptions) and a start is a "when" (a time)".
>> The WG acknowledges that the definitions as shown support this concern.
>> The inconsistency between Influence and its immediate subclasses
>> {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence is addressed by the response to the earlier
>> comment ("phrasing of definitions").
>> To address the inconsistency between {Influence,
>> {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence} and {Start,End}, PROV-DM updated the
>> definitions for Start and End:
>>
>> Start is when an activity is deemed to have been started by an an entity,
>> known as trigger . The activity did not exist before its start. Any usage,
>> generation, or invalidation involving an activity follows the activity's
>> start. A start may refer to a trigger entity that set off the activity, or
>> to an activity, known as starter , that generated the trigger. ref
>> End is when an activity is deemed to have been ended by an entity, known as
>> trigger . The activity no longer exists after its end. Any usage,
>> generation, or invalidation involving an activity precedes the activity's
>> end. An end may refer to a trigger entity that terminated the activity, or
>> to an activity, known as ender that generated the trigger. ref
>>
>> References:
>> Changes to the document:
>>
>> prov-dm updated the definitions for revision, quotation, and primary source
>> to reinforce that each is a relation.
>> prov-o changed to add axioms:
>>
>> prov:Revision rdfs:subClassOf prov:Derivation .
>> prov:PrimarySource rdfs:subClassOf prov:Derivation .
>> prov:Quotation rdfs:subClassOf prov:Derivation .
>>
>> prov-o "demoted" the original definitions of
>> {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence to rdfs:comments.
>> prov-o created new definitions for {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence to align
>> with their parent class definition.
>> prov-o removed existing comments on {Entity,Agent,Activity}Influence that
>> were very similar to the new "prov-dm centric" definitions. The removed
>> comments had more of an OWL flavor to them instead of an abstract flavor.
>> For example, the following comment was removed:
>>
>> "ActivityInfluence is intended to be a general subclass of Influence of an
>> Activity. It is a superclass for more specific kinds of Influences (e.g.
>> Generation, Communication, and Invalidation)." in favor of the definition
>> "ActivitiyInfluence is the capacity an activity to have an effect on the
>> character, development, or behavior of another by means of generation,
>> invalidation, communication, or other."
>>
>> The latest draft of the PROV-O html document reflects the definitions
>> changed in the PROV-O OWL file:
>>
>> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#EntityInfluence,
>> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#ActivityInfluence,
>> http://aquarius.tw.rpi.edu/prov-wg/prov-o#AgentInfluence
>>
>> PROV-DM's new definition for Start -> PROV-O's new definition for Start
>> PROV-DM's new definition for End -> PROV-O's new definition for End
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 13, 2012, at 7:27 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker
>> <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>> PROV-ISSUE-552 (subclass-prov-o): Check subclass definitions in prov-o
>> [Ontology]
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/552
>>
>> Raised by: Paul Groth
>> On product: Ontology
>>
>> See email from Alan Ruttenberg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
--
----------- ~oo~ --------------
Paolo Missier - Paolo.Missier@newcastle.ac.uk, pmissier@acm.org
School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, UK
http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/Paolo.Missier